Rape equality may just require more male rapes
by Jennifer Kesler
October 8, 2005
Note: this post is aimed at people not human enough to realize that rape is a serious issue, and is scorchingly facetious in spots. While I’ve tried to avoid making cracks that might bother actual humans, it’s entirely possible I’ve failed, in which case I apologize in advance. Anyone not sensitive to the issue, I hope I have offended deeply Go cry in your beer.
A couple of weeks ago, I saw my 1,018th implied rape of a woman on TV. It was behind closed doors, kinda vague. There was no real fallout or anything. It was just kinda… not there, but there. And I gave myself a couple of weeks to see if I chilled out about it – in anger management therapy, they suggest counting to ten when you feel your temper blowing – but I didn’t.
I thought at first for this article, maybe I should explain some things about rape – about the physical damage it causes (sometimes chronic for the rest of the person’s life), about how it happens to men and boys as well as women and girls, etc., and what it’s really about. Then I realized I have no indication men read this site, and any woman who doesn’t get what the big deal about rape is (yes, I’ve known a few who believe it only happens to wanton hussies who deserve it), will probably not be swayed by anything I say, and had better just keep hoping she never has to learn the hard way. So here’s a link to a site that offers simple factual info on rape for any of the 3-4 estimated readers I have who don’t already take rape seriously.
So, realizing that none of the male TV producers who should read about this are likely to be at my little site, I tried to think of another way to make the point. When negotiation fails, aggression results. I can be aggressive. I don’t see honesty or equality coming about the easy way on this issue, so let’s try an ugly way.
Let’s have more shows about men getting raped. If it’s good story for women, it must be good for men, too. And it does happen in real life, even though men so rarely report it that people tend not to be very aware. It can even be more psychologically traumatic for men because they have so much more invested in “being on top”, which women have had beaten out of them from the time they left the womb and their lack of a penis was disclosed to everyone present.
If you guys will make more shows about raped men, I promise to watch. I’m not sure whether you think male viewers find it sort of titillating (on the sly, of course), or if you think it’s the only way they can feel sympathy for a female character, or what. Whatever it is, I promise to boost your ratings and buy from your advertisers if you’ll just show more and more men undergoing implied hideous brutalization and walking away like they’re neither physically nor mentally bruised, thus trivializing rape for everyone instead of just women. I would prefer that these implied rapes be by other men – you know how we gals get off on that homoerotic stuff – because it just doesn’t seem to have the same effect when it’s a woman raping a man. For example, when Stargate SG-1 presented an implied, behind-closed-doors drug-induced rape of a man by a female, a lot of male viewers reported that it wasn’t rape because it didn’t apparently involve the male being penetrated in any way, and voted it among the “sexiest Stargate episodes ever”. I want to make sure it’s clear to male viewers that this isn’t sexy, because it’s clear to me that women being raped is not sexy. And I can’t think of anything but a demonstration that’s going to get the violence of rape across to people who haven’t the cranial capacity to think it through on their own.
After all, white guys suddenly figured out how evil they thought a system of skin-color based promotions was when it happened for non-white guys instead of them, for a change. Maybe if they get to experience first-hand the trivialization of one of the most traumatic experiences a person of either gender can experience, they will demand that this horrible sick stuff be taken off the air, and that’s when we step forward and say, “But it’s been happening for 50 years, just to women – you were fine with it then. What the heck are you saying?”
What’s good for the gander is good for the goose.
Subscribe to Hathor and never miss an entry!
All Posts (RSS) | All Comments (RSS)
Email Post | Print This
Posted in Ponderables, Sci-Fi/Fantasy on October 8, 2005
Subscribe to Hathor's 
“…when Stargate SG-1 presented an implied, behind-closed-doors drug-induced rape of a man by a female…”
Wasn’t that in the episode “Hathor”? Any relation to the site’s name?
[Yes I am a SG1 geek]
Yep, that’s the ep I’m talking about, Eve. As for the site name, I’ve always been into Egyptology, which is part of why I’m into SG-1, so it kinda connects and kinda doesn’t.
Actually, the explanation for the site name is here.
Hi Beta. Thought you’d like to hear from a guy who found your article funny and interesting. Like you, I and my youngest daughter are both definitely SG-1 fans. She loves Jack O’Neill… I suppose I am required as a man to find Sam Carter very “interesting”, like all males apparently do. However, if I were to fall in Stargate Love, it would have to be with Dr. Janet. I was crushed when the writers let her die. Hopefully they’ll get a clue and bring her back!
As for the Hathor episode, I got a kick out of it, even as a guy. A little irritating for me as a male, but not because of the so-called “rape” scene. Preposterous. Not even sure I’d call it “rape”. Rather, the episode (mildly) offended because it portrays all men as stupid sheep to be led astray by the first strong, sexy woman who comes their way. My brother (a USMC Col.) was Mission Director at Cheyenne Mt. for 8 years, and you can rest assured that Evil Women have no more chance of taking the place over than do Evil Men. The staff there are an absolutely fantastic group of people (men AND women). THe place is in good hands, I assure you.
Perhaps, though, SG1 needs a corresponding episode where an ultra-sexy male Goa’uld leads some of the ladies astray. Myself, I would just love to see Miss Perfect Samantha “take a walk on the dark side” for a few episodes. Amanda Tapping and Cliff Simon (Ba’al) would make a positively LOVELY couple, and the Sam/Jack “shippers” would howl up a storm!
Anyway, as to scenes of men being raped. Very funny, yes… hardy=harhar. The sarcasm is well-done and well-directed. And, for men who trivialize rape, it’s thoroughly justified. I don’t get the impression, though, that nearly so many men look as lightly on rape as you indicate. Among the people I’m around every day, I cannot think of anyone who would trivialize it. We are just too fond of our wives, sisters, and daughters for that. In fact, most of us at work are conservatives (the political opposite of most feminists), and we are universal in our support for the infliction of capital punishment for first-degree sexual assault or attempt thereof. Not something that would qualify us as rape-trivializers.
Of course I do not wish to attribute more seriousness to your essay than you intend. Satire is designed to exaggerate. But as to the portrayal (or even reality) of an increase in rape of males by males… I strongly suggest that the cause of womens’ rights and safety would not be aided by such a turn of events. There are men who will rape women but who will not rape men. Men who will rape men, however, are not at all above raping women when the opportunity arises. The highest concentration of rape of males by males occurs in prisons, of course, and there are no females available there. The point I wish to stress is that one evil is never ameriolated by promoting another. As Ghandi once said “taking an eye for an eye… until the whole world is blind”. Hostility toward males will not serve to make them “see the light”. (There are women who’s whole livelyhood involves acting as sexual parasites on an endless list of males, taking everything they can get and giving nothing in return. Should a man who’s been scorched by such a creature console himself with dreams of women-in-general being raped and humiliated, just because he had the poor fortune to run into a bad one? Of course not. We will not make the world better by making part of it worse. Men AND women need to take rape (of ANYONE) very seriously. And this starts by NEVER trivializing the subject.
Sincerely,
WAC
Janet absolutely rocked. I very much agree with you there.
I didn’t feel the Hathor episode showed men as sheep: Hathor drugged them with a substance they clearly struggled very hard to resist. Every time men tell me that wasn’t a rape scene, I have to wonder what they think when a woman is drugged by someone who then has sex with her while she’s conscious but unable to control her body. That’s exactly what happened in the episode.
And in case it wasn’t clear, it’s not I who thinks that men find rape tantalizing or take it lightly. It’s the people making TV shows who think this is how male viewers want to see rape portrayed on TV. One of the main purposes of my site is to educate people about just how little then film and TV industry think of us all as viewers.
It makes me furious whenever I come across a fan who claims that scene in “Hathor” wasn’t rape. Just like you do, I wonder if they switched the genders, would they still be claiming someone drugged and taken against their will wasn’t raped?
But how the writers handled it makes me doubly furious. The only acknowledgment of it was a throw-away line at the end, like it didn’t matter to anyone in that locker room that Daniel had been sexually assaulted. You would think that if his friends couldn’t bring themselves to be concerned, that at the very least Janet (as his doctor) would have cared.
I cannot come away from that episode without feeling deeply angry.
No one has mentioned it, but the sex scene in “Brief Candle” with Jack and Kynthia, could also be considered rape, as Jack was drugged prior to the sexual act. On the other hand, in this case the act occurred out of a misunderstanding rather than malevolence, so its impact was not as great. Still, if it had been Sam who had been selected by one ofthe males of the tribe, I must think that the SG-1 team would have acted differently.
I agree with that completely. The “Brief Candle” scene was a form of rape, and the reason it was less traumatic for Jack is because there was no malicious intent to harm or violate. But I never bought the later scenes where he’s all lovey with Kynthia – not just okay with what happened, but actually seeming to feel an emotional connection with her that wasn’t present before they had sex.
My guess is that the “Brief Candle” script began life as a little love jaunt for Jack, but then the Air Force advisor told them no way in hell would a respectable colonel in charge of a mission permit himself a sexual liaison in that situation, so they introduced the drug, but didn’t bother to edit the later scenes that made the whole encounter seem like an actual love affair. With the benefit of hindsight, I can see that the question, “How would I feel in this situation?” is just not a question Stargate writers ask themselves while writing scenes for their characters.
Did anyone else here see the most recent episode of Rescue Me? (i.e. “Satisfaction” on July 18?)
SPOILERS
In a previous episode, Tommy Gavin (Denis Leary) more or less raped his soon-to-be-ex-wife (Andrea Roth), but she acted as if she didn’t mind – and later even met him for a consensual booty call – the previous encounter was acted out sort of in reverse, but this time it was clear hat both people were consenting. However, the viewers were promised “karmic payback” for Tommy. Well, in an attempt to get back at his brother for being his soon-to-be-ex-wife’s new lover, he and his brother’s ex-wife (Angie, played by Marisa Tomei) decided to go out and have a tryst. Well, his cousin-in-law and former mistress, Sheila (Callie Thorne), found out and went ballistic (she still carries a torch for him; he sort of “filled in” for her husband, his cousin, after he died in 9/11) This week sbe went over to his house and made dinner for him while he was out (his roommate let her in). She confronted him about his being seen with Angie, and then accepts his obviously lies about it.
Well, the kicker is that while he is out, she makes him a cranberry and seltzer (no alcohol, he is a recovering alcoholic), and puts Rohypnol and Viagra in it. She winds up raping him after he passes out, and then she makes the apartment to look like he had fallen off the wagon and gotten drunk, and leaves.
Tommy remembers very little (if anything) of that evening and assumes that he had a relapse and a blackout.
I didn’t see that. Could you clarify what you mean by “more or less raped”? And also, are you saying the soon-to-be-ex acted like she didn’t mind after the fact, or before the fact, or during the act, or… when? I’m trying to get straight whether this is a realistic portrayal of… whatever it was.
Well, in the scene Tommy and Janet are dividing up their furnitureJanet says she will let Tommy keep some piece of furniture. He gets mad, and says “stands up and looks at Janet saying, “Let me get this straight. You’re going to let me keep the dining room table I bought with money I earned running into burning buildings while people are running out.” Then he pushes her onto the couch, gets on top of her and starts tearing at her clothes. She struggles, but does not say “no,” or “don’t” (I bring that fact up because the producers of the show thought it was important). She asks if this makes him feel like a man, and then eventually just stops struggling. It is pretty obvious when Tommy has achieved union, and then he moves back and forth several times, and she sort of looks on. When he is finished, she straightends up her clothes, tells Tommy not to worry about tearing her blouse, and they go back to discussing furniture.
Here is a recap of the episode (Last two paragraphs of the main post.
It seemed like a rape to me, and it seemed like she had just rewritten it as consensual sex in her head because she was too weary to deal with it. But the producers and Leary seemed to hem and haw a little at the idea that it was rape, and in later episodes, she doesn’t seem to hold this against him. (As I said initially, she recreates the scene in reverse with him later on, except that in the recreation he is obviously a willing participant).
I should say that I have read of interviews were Leary denies it was rape, and ones where he admits that “technically” it was rape.
Other articles I’m reading indicate that she says “stop” and “no” and punches him. Then some of them think she climaxed because she moaned “oh god” and seemed to enjoy it. I find that some people can’t tell the difference between moans of agony or ecstasy, but most people I’m reading feel it was rape.
Ultimately, if a partner says “no” or “stop, there can be no further legal debate as to whether it’s rape. Obviously, S&M can put a wrinkle into this set up, which is why you have “safewords” other than “no” and “stop”, which you might want to moan as part of the roleplay.
But I’m seeing no indication any previous S&M has been depicted with this couple, so that’s irrelevant. It’s rape.
Also worth mentioning: normal, sane men do not segue from anger/frustration to sexual frenzy – that connection is only made in insane minds. That’s the pathology that allows rape. And rapists are chronic and serial. It’s virtually guaranteed he’s raped her before, and perhaps that’s why she acquiesced and tried to enjoy it (if indeed those were moans of pleasure).
I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though. If he’s unconscious at the time, it hardly sounds like she can expect him to be traumatized, or recognize that she’s had revenge. So I’m not seeing it as revenge. I have a bad feeling it’s going to come off more like “she can’t get enough of him” than “she’s hurt him”. If for no reason other than the average viewer still seems to think men should define sexual violation as “getting laid” and feel grateful.
What is beyond inexcusable, however, is Leary’s public statement that it’s not rape. A lot of rapists will agree with him. I don’t object to realistic portrayals of rape, but I very much object to portrayals of rape which we’re told to look at as consensual, somehow.
I can’t really disagree with you about the rape. I just figured that if the producers didn’t see it that way, maybe there was something that I missed.
I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though.
I am sorry if I was not clear. Janet (hiss ex-wife) was raped by him. Sheila (his late cousin’s widow) raped him.
I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though. If he’s unconscious at the time, it hardly sounds like she can expect him to be traumatized, or recognize that she’s had revenge.
I’m not sure she cares if he knows as long as she knows. As far as trauma, he is a recovering alcoholic who hasn’t had a drink in over a year (if I recall correctly) and she has made him think that he fell off the wagon and had a blackout.
I have a bad feeling it’s going to come off more like “she can’t get enough of him†than “she’s hurt himâ€.
I don’t think so, as Sheila hasn’t bee ni nvolved with him sexually or romantically for at least a year. It is pretty clear, though, that she wants to get back together with him. He has made it fairly clear, though, that he does not want any sexual relationship with her.
Since the end of the previous epsiode, Sheila has been portrayed as jealous and angry to the point of being enraged. More than anything, she seemed to be defying Tommy’s rejection of her. I don’t see this event as having positive repercusions for Tommy.
I don’t think you missed anything. Leary is just dead wrong. I don’t even see a way they could think they put across something other than rape.
Ah, I did think you meant the ex-wife and not the other woman you talked about. As for that rape, I’m still not sure what to make of it. From a story perspective, it’s a rape and that’s interesting, but of course I like to evaluate what the creative powers make of their storylines and the messages they seem to be sending.
At this point, all I can say is Leary needs to pull his head out of that smelly place he’s jammed it.
I was just thinking about the “Hathor” episode of Stargate recently, and realized what really made me doubt the writers motives:
Either Daniel was raped by Hathor, or he cheated on his wife.
There is no in-between. You have to pick one interpretation or the other. If he made a choice, it’s adultery. If he didn’t get to make a choice, it’s rape.
The fact that the writers never implied it was infidelity suggests to me they knew what they were writing: rape.
Unless. of course, the writers didn’t feel it was infidelity because he didn’t do so of his own free will, but never actually thought about the fact that sex against one’s will is rape.
I can think of at least one case where it is clear that the sexual encounter was not consensual, but because the perp was a female and the vic a male the idea that it was rape did not occur to me until I thought about it (and it clearly did not occur to the writers).
In 40 Days and 40 Nigths, Josh Hartnett’s character’s 40 day celibacy vow is broken at the last minute when, after he has tied himelf to the bed so to make certain he doesn’t masturbate (which would break his vow), his ex-girlfried, who has bet money on him not making it, comes in and has sex with him while he is asleep.
While his new girlfriend finds her and assumes he cheated, it is very clear from the context that he didn’t want to have sex with his ex. It is also made clear that this was done maliciouly against him, and that he should be considered the injured party. Yet the idea that this encounter was rape is never suggested, and it is never made clear that he was violated, rather, the implication is that she wronged him by defeating his “chastity quest.”
Well, if so, that level of ignorance is unacceptable in someone writing for public consumption. It’s one thing for a young viewer not to get it – at some point, we were all ignorant.
That’s no excuse for someone being paid to write fiction in a media that is regulated by the FCC specifically because the government believes in its ability to influence the masses.
How do you suppose you would feel, watching Hathor, if at some point in your life a woman had drugged and raped you? Most likely, 99% of the people you told about it would have laughed and congratulated you for getting some, because you’re a guy, and that’s what guys are for. The police wouldn’t have taken you seriously – sheesh, they hardly take women seriously. The D.A. wouldn’t have cared. And eventually you might have even questioned your own assessment – did you do something to lead her on? Did you want it on some deep level? And then to see that episode, reaffirming that it’s not rape.
This is what women have been dealing with for years, until probably the 70′s or 80′s when we got a national dialog going. But boys who suffer sexual abuse of any sort are still fairly marooned out there. And where do you think male rapists come from?
It’s a cycle we need to be working on from EVERY angle. Protect boys from abuse, and you will reduce female rapes. Teach everyone how to handle male rape victims with sensitivity, and we’ll reduce rape in general. Etc.
What did people here think of Wedding Crashers? There’s a rape in it that not only did most viewers not notice, because it was a woman raping a man, but the censors in my province didn’t notice it either. And the film played it for laughs. I don’t think Hollywood is going to be getting this one any time soon.
I did a rewrite of the rape scene on my blog, as revenge.
SG-1′s Hathor.
I liked the scene between Sam & Janet, which I think is the first one we get.
I like that MS put effort into making Daniel seem traumatized, which I suspect was greatly a product of the actor, not the writers.
Otherwise that episode was problematic. With just a little tweaking, it could have been a very good episode as it does deal with a sorta of reversal of societal gender roles. It would have been a disturbing but meaningful episode. Instead….*sigh*